Case law

Samma v. U.S. Department of Defense

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 4, 2020

In such cases, typicality is clearly satisfied. D. … Accordingly, the fourth criteria of adequacy of representation is clearly satisfied. IV.

Detroit International Bridge Company v. Government of Canada

53 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2014

the National Military Establishment. … Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602 et seq.

In Re Korean Air Lines Disaster of September 1, 1983

597 F. Supp. 613 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 18, 1984

Since such alleged negligence is not based upon “imperfectly executing a federal program established either by an act of Congress or a federal regulation” it is not actionable. Gercey v. … Decisions which require a government official to weigh competing policy alternatives are entitled to immunity for such decisions are the ordinary responsibility of the legislative and executive branches.

State of Alaska v. Lubchenco

825 F. Supp. 2d 209 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 21, 2011

However, because defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all claims, it is not necessary to address whether EOC has established standing. … We consider stranding to be a major factor establishing this DPS as endangered. 73 Fed. Reg. 62928.

Fernandez v. Donovan

760 F. Supp. 2d 31 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 12, 2011

In response, plaintiff argues that his complaint to the EEO qualifies as a “mixed case complaint” under CSRA, 5 U.S.C. § 7702 . Pl. Opp’n to Def.’s Mot. Dismiss (“Pl. Opp’n”) at 8-11. … This Court, therefore, will review defendant’s motion under the 12(b)(1) framework. 1 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), “the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the factual predicates of jurisdiction

Sheller-Paire v. Gray

888 F. Supp. 2d 34 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2012

Compliance is mandatory because this statute is part of a sovereign-immunity waiver. Johnson v. District of Columbia, 572 F. Supp. 2d 94, 111 (D.D.C. 2008). … s Opp'n 11-12, and summarily concludes that "[a]ll of the heretofore exhibits and facts clearly establish sufficient substantiation and inference one could believe the Plaintiff was discriminated against based upon his

Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 2, 2025

Nor do Defendants dispute that Plaintiffs’ counsel are qualified to represent the class, and, in any event, the Court has considered that question sua sponte and concludes that current counsel are well-qualified. … clearly violates the APA we would vacate its action.”). To be sure, decisions in this circuit have, on occasion, remanded a rule without vacatur, see Allied–Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regul.

Bonnette v. Shinseki

907 F. Supp. 2d 54 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2012

The VA has stated that it denied this request because Bonnette was not qualified for the EEO counselor position. Def.’s St. Facts ¶¶ 42–45. … Work Place Disagreements and Conflicts Plaintiff was clearly frustrated by her interactions with her exacting supervisor, and her complaint details a series of annoying and embarrassing workplace grievances.

American Ass'n for Advancement of Science v. Hearst Corp.

498 F. Supp. 244 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 28, 1980

Clearly, AAAS’s magazine has established for itself among these groups of people a special meaning in the word “Science.” … Degree of Care Taken by Purchasers However intelligent or sophisticated the readers of Science and Science Digest might be, Hearst has not shown that such people are immune from impulse buying.

United States v. Anderson

384 F. Supp. 2d 32 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 1, 2005

The behavior underlying these charged of *36 fenses clearly suggests that Mr. Anderson is a flight risk. See United States v. … immunity.

Johnson v. Greater Southeast Community Hospital Corp.

903 F. Supp. 140 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 19, 1995

However, Defendants’ conduct in both instances is clearly postformation, and as such, is simply not actionable under § 1981. … Judge McGowan elaborated on this analysis: This test calls for application of general principles of agency to undisputed or established facts.

Gee v. Boorstin

500 F. Supp. 1025 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 28, 1980

Gee was not qualified for the supervisory position. … The qualifications and requirements for the GS-10 position were not clearly demonstrated to be job-related. In any event, Mrs. Gee by competent testimony was regarded as minimally qualified.

Iyoha v. Architect of the Capitol

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 25, 2017

Also, concerning the alternative inference that the plaintiff was qualified for the job, again the plaintiff misses the mark, which is not whether he was qualified, but whether he was substantially more qualified than … The Court has already concluded that the Architect’s stated reason for the plaintiff’s non-selections in 2014 and in 2015, (i.e., that the candidates selected were more qualified than the plaintiff), qualifies as a legitimate

Carter v. Rubin

14 F. Supp. 2d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 28, 1998

As clearly stated, this letter constituted final agency action with respect to the rejected portions of Carter’s complaint. … In the instant case, Carter is a member of a protected class as a female and was qualified for her position at the time of her termination.

In Re Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation

570 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 7, 2008

Moreover, even if the court has jurisdiction to remedy the petitioners’ grievances, the merits of the claims themselves fall short of establishing a likelihood of success. … In this regard, the petitioners have clearly failed to make a showing which adequately supports the relief requested.

Lazaridis v. United States Department of State

934 F. Supp. 2d 21 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2013

interest in non-disclosure against any qualifying public interest in disclosure. … Circuit instructs: To establish that the release of information contained in government files would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy, the court first asks whether disclosure

Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. v. Sebelius

901 F. Supp. 2d 19 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 31, 2012

In 2006, the Medicare program established more stringent enrollment requirements. Medicare Program; Requirements for Providers and Suppliers to Establish and Maintain Medicare Enrollment, 71 Fed. … Defendants clearly had the statutory authority to introduce the change requests.

Woodhull Freedom Foundation v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2018

The burden for establishing the affirmative defense lies with the defendant, who must establish this fact by a preponderance of the evidence. [d. … First, it immunizes interactive computer services from criminal and civil liability for content created by third parties.

Dougherty v. Cable News Network

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 2019

Implementing regulations for the ADA provide further guidance both as to what might qualify as an essential function and as to what type of evidence can help establish what those essential functions are. … First, a plaintiff must establish his prima facie case of discrimination by showing 1) that he had a disability within the meaning of the ADA, 2) that he was qualified for the position, with or without an accommodation

Fitzgerald v. Tillerson

District Court, District of Columbia · May 31, 2024

Whether the Plaintiff has Established a Prima Facie Case of Discrimination for the Failure to Accommodate his Disability. … This evidence clearly provides a “legitimate[,]” and facially credible non-discriminatory reason for the plaintiff’s non-selection for the position as required under Figueroa. 932 F.3d at 1087.